Customer Reviews: Intel Core i7-2600K Quad-Core Processor 3.4 Ghz 8 MB Cache LGA 1155 - BX80623I72600K
Oct16 Amazon Fashion nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Electronics Holiday Gift Guide Starting at $39.99 Cozy Knits Book 2 or More Hours of House Cleaning on Amazon LoveandFriendship LoveandFriendship LoveandFriendship  All-New Echo Dot Introducing new colors All-New Kindle for Kids Edition Elvis Presley Shop Cycling on Amazon

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on February 1, 2011
I've upgraded from my E8400 to this CPU. Even when not overclocked, 2600K outperforms my E8400 exactly 3 times in video processing and rendering. Considering what I've paid for E8400 several years ago, difference in speed is just excellent.
0Comment| 49 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 9, 2011
During my most recent build I upgraded from a Q6600 -- which was a good chip back in its day. This chip SCREAMS, however.

I have it overclocked to 4.5 Ghz on ASUS P8P67 PRO motherboard with 8 gigs of G Skill ripjaws ram using the Asus AI Suite. Windows Experience Index gives this a score of 7.8 in my system. Passmark Software CPU Benchmark (google them) ranks this processor the 7th best performing CPU, in the following order (it was Number 3 when I bought it):

Intel Core i7 990X @ 3.47GHz cpu mark: 10,917 NA
Intel Core i7 995X @ 3.60GHz cpu mark: 10,795 NA
Intel Core i7 980X @ 3.33GHz cpu mark: 10,482 $999.99*
Intel Core i7 970 @ 3.20GHz cpu mark: 9,925 $899.99**
Intel Xeon X5680 @ 3.33GHz cpu mark: 9,721 $1,676.49*
Intel Xeon W3680 @ 3.33GHz cpu mark: 9,655 $1,127.12*
Intel Xeon X5675 @ 3.07GHz cpu mark: 9,326 NA
Intel Core i7-2600K @ 3.40GHz cpu mark: 9,291 $329.99**

Note that three of the CPU's that have better performance scores are NOT commercially available at the current time, and the remaining three processors are three to five times the price of this one. The closest desktop AMD processor is the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T, which has cpu mark scores only in the 6000 range. Passmark also has a price-to-performance chart that rates your best bang for the buck, though many of the highest scoring processors on that chart are simply much slower and much cheaper.

I am very happy with this: it overclocks extremely well and stays very cool. It runs all my programs with blazing speed, including BFBC2 with all settings on high. At 4.5 Ghz and full load, it doesn't go over 38 degrees Celsius.

Get it at this price while they're still available. Highly recommended.
3939 comments| 146 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 2, 2011
This processor is so much faster than my prior build, a Core i7-920, it's amazing. This puppy is almost as fast as the fastest $1,000 Gulf Town processor, for 1/3rd the price! It's performing flawlessly for me so far. I'm still playing with the overclocking, but some of my friends have gotten this chip up to 5.2 Ghz and beyond using just air cooling on the same motherboard I have, the Asus Maximus IV Extreme. I'm still playing around in the high 4s.

The design of the Sandy Bridge CPUs appear flawless. I'm just bummed that they wasted all those transistors on a useless (for many of us), mediocre video processor.

The "Cougar Point" P67/H67 Chipset problem is easily avoided. Just don't use the Intel SATA II ports on your Motherboard! No big deal if you have a good quality Motherboard with ample SATA III and non-Intel SATA II ports. How many people have more than 4 Optical and HDDs in their system anyway? The fellow who blamed the problem on the Sandy Bridge CPUs is entirely off base and unjustified...
33 comments| 62 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 11, 2011
Bought this i7 2600K chip for my new setup. Stably overclocked to 4.5Ghz on air with the Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus. Managed to test 5.0Ghz as some have claimed but got BoD the moment Windows logo appeared.

4.5 Ghz Overlocked
Idle Temp: Stable at 38 C
100% Load Temp: Stable at 68 C
Room's Ambient Temp: 30 C

For video conversion through HandShake, i7 2600K takes about 1/5th of the time a Core 2 Duo 6600 takes to complete.
22 comments| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 20, 2011
This processor is simply astounding. Period. I've run several benchmarks with it and have been totally satsified with the results. Forget i7 950's or even the ridiculous 980X; this processor shreds them all in most apps. It is also fairly energy efficient and is the OC champion of the day. Seriously, overclocking this processor is as easy as changing the multiplier in the bios to whatever you want (mine is set at x44 giving me 4533MHz). Add a decent cpu HSF and you can easily see 4.5-5.2 GHz on air!! These 32Nm chips are seriously quick and the Ivy Bridge processors of later this year will fit in the 1155 socket. Now is the time to get in on the Sandy Bridge bandwagon for sure!

Pors: Amazing stock speeds with incredibly simple overclock ability/Energy efficient/Low temps/Next generation architecture/AMD who???

Cons: None that I can think of...

Other notes: Buy the less expensive i5 2500k if you do not plan on heavy video encoding etc. The 2600k's feature set is pretty much useless for pure-gaming performance....
0Comment| 12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
VINE VOICEon March 31, 2012
I could not be happier with this CPU. I really wanted HD Graphics 3000 that is built into the chip, which (1) has built in optimizations for HD video playback and conversions, (2) can offer a lower power usage than some power hungry graphics cards (less power, less cost, less heat, less noise from less heat to exhaust, and more reliability from lower heat), (3) is better than many entry level discrete graphics cards. Of course it doesn't really compare to the current generation of expensive high end graphics cards that cost almost as much as this chip, but it gives others a run for their money. I really wanted to make sure that viewing, editing, and converting video from my HD video camera was as optimized as possible, which is what HD Graphics 3000 can uniquely offer by being optimized right on the CPU. In terms of power, my system idles at about 50W.

The stock fan provided with the retail version is all that you need if you are not overclocking and have a case with decent airflow, like the Cooler Master Storm Enforcer. The desktop tools monitor (from my Intel DZ68BC motherboard) always shows that I am running at the low end of heat ranges for the CPU and temperature in my case. Heat hasn't remotely been a problem. I don't think the fan is whisper quiet though. However, there 2 important things to mention. (1) The power cable comes wrapped around the fan in what looks like cable management that you don't have to unwrap all the way. But the problem is the cable actually comes into contact with the fan blades at a few places that you might not notice at first. This would make noise, cause cooling problems, or burn up the chip if you don't unwrap it. I thought at first I could just uncoil a tiny bit to plug to the connector right next to it, but I am really glad I caught that. The instructions made no mention. (2) It didn't snap easily into place like the instructions say. I had to use a screwdriver to turn the nuts in the end on a few posts, but overall was easy, but I had to use a screwdriver despite instructions that said otherwise.

The 2700K versus this 2600K offers only 100MHz more, that's all, and is only a fractional improvement. So you just need to calculate the cost difference between the 2700K and 2600K and see if that is worth a measly 100MHz or not. If only a very small cost difference, I would definitely go with the 2700K. If a moderate or large difference, I wouldn't pay too much for only 100MHz. When I bought my i7-2600K, I would have had to pay 22% more to get far less of a gain in processing power. I have zero regrets with going with the i7-2600K and not waiting around for the 2700K to be a perfect value.
11 comment| 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 2, 2011
This processor screams and tears through everything, all while managing to keep remarkably cool. Overclocked sound and stable to 4.5 ghz on a cheap air cooler

Some benchmarks @ 4.5:

Windows 7 WEI - 7.8
Cinebench 11.5 - 8.84 pts
Super PI 32m - 7m 45s
Passmark CPU performance 7.0 64 bit - 11700

Luckily my motherboard has 4 SATA III ports so I can avoid the faulty chipset issue with my 2 hard drives + 1 optical. Not in a huge hurry to exchange my board as system is rock solid
22 comments| 9 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 17, 2011
OK to the guy who said it has no advantages over the 2500k or the Athlon: Yes, it does. It is faster. It may not be much faster, but you really can't down-rate the processor because you think it is overpriced. The rating is supposed to be about the performance and quality of the product. There is a sub rating for value if you feel it is not worth it. As for the processor, I can't say enough about it. I'm easily overclocking it to 4.43Ghz using a Corsair A50 Heatsink. No temp issues and when it comes to rendering video, audio or any kind of compression, this thing kills the competition.

Great Processor!
0Comment| 8 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 27, 2011
* Overall the processor is extremely fast and reliable...
* Overclocks Extremely fast and easy.
* Low voltage compared to my Q6600 (between .95-1.3 depending on Turbo and frequency)
* Have overclocked to 4.6Ghz and 4.9Ghz when turbo kicks in. Totally stable and runs only 2-4degrees Fahrenheit above room temperature during full throttle and runs at 75-82 degrees Fahrenheit (21-30C) during idle PC work (internet surfing, etc.) and up to 50C or 145ish F. Very cool for the speed and transistor count. I have experience with a $100 X4 AMD running at 4Ghz and when this processor is set to 4Ghz it runs circles around AMD. (I realize the price difference but do not be fooled when your friends try to one up you with a 4Ghz AMD and this spanks the 6-Core as well)
* According to Sandra Utilities at complete stock settings with mem set to 1066(had bad mem) it was fastest score on list and I rated in at 800th place out of every benchmark in world! and at 4.6Ghz with new ram running at 1866 I was rated the 270th fastest score in world. I was rated at 117GOPS. Freaking AWESOME! My Q6600 only scored a 36GOPS running at 3Ghz... So huge improvement!

Other Thoughts:
* For basic overclocks between 4-4.4Ghz it is as easy as typing in 44 in the multiplier and hit save and close. DONE! That is it... For 4.5-4.6Gh you need to increase voltage a smudge and save. With my Gigabyte UD7 I simply set the Vcore Voltage to "Level 1"(Small increase) and save. Still very easy. For 4.7Ghz-5.2Ghz you will have to Learn how to adjust many settings- (Turbo On/Off?, Proper Vcore, and proper mem timings to go with the those speeds. All doable, but time consuming in the beginning. Find the sweet spot and you are off. This is assuming you have a $50+ dollar air cooler or H70 Water block.

If you have any questions about Overclocking, etc, let me know.

My system is as follows:

* Cooler Master HAF X (AMAZING CASE)
* G.SKILL Ripjaws X (17000) 8GB (2 x 4GB)
* COOLER MASTER Silent Pro Gold Series RS800-80GAD3-US 800W (completely silent)
* EVGA 570GTX Super Clock
* Prolimatech Megahalems Rev. B with a push/pull setup using Cooler Master 120mm Green LED Case Fan - (R4-L2R-20CG-GP 90CFM. (This is an AMAZING cooler and beats my brothers H70 water cooling setup and is completely silent at 18DB)
* Vertex 2 for OS and 3 WD4 500gigs in Raid 0 for data.... No bottle neck here :) Vertex 2- 270Mbs and my raid is 400Mbs
1313 comments| 12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 21, 2012
Most people you see doing reviews for this are usually game enthusiasts. There are magazines dedicated to building "Dream Machine" PC gaming computers. So as a musician looking to build a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW), most articles and reviews were not helpful. Definitely do your research as to what programs will be using and if the processor matches up. I use Cubase to record with. Fortunately enough, Cubase DOES utilize hyperthreading. Makes everything a little speedier and quicker. This thing is amazing as a for my DAW. I can run multiple VST's on tracks unfrozen with barely any CPU usage. I think with about 8 VST's, my CPU usage was only 7%. And thats insane since my last machine only had a dual-core @ 1.5 Ghz. On my dual-core system, that would have ran me up to about 30-40%.

I run Cubase to record live tracks. And I use FL 10 ran through re-wire into Cubase with Superior Drummer(X64). With additional drum library packs that eat up ram (56% of my 8G of Corsair Vengeance RAM TBE). This processor never goes above 20% usage. It stays at a constant 3.8 GHZ with Intel Turbo Boost. I haven't had the need to OC this thing. It blazes through any audio rendering. With aforementioned programs running, I can render a .wav into .mp3 in around 30 seconds!! It used to take a minute to a minute-and-a-half on my dual-core.

If you are looking at processors to build something for recording, this is the best thing to look at. I have seen other DAW's running the same programs with other leading processors, and there is no comparison.
0Comment| 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse